June-Sung Kim1, Youn-Jung Kim1, Won Young Kim2. 1. Department of Emergency Medicine, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Asan Medical Center, 88, Olympic-ro 43-gil., Songpa-gu, Seoul, 05505, Korea. 2. Department of Emergency Medicine, University of Ulsan College of Medicine, Asan Medical Center, 88, Olympic-ro 43-gil., Songpa-gu, Seoul, 05505, Korea. wonpia73@naver.com.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: We evaluated the characteristics and outcomes of culture-negative versus culture-positive septic shock. METHODS: We performed a retrospective observational study of data from a prospective registry from 2014 to 2018. A total of 2,499 adult patients with septic shock were enrolled. The primary outcome was 90-day mortality, and the secondary outcomes were the length of hospital stay, a requirement for mechanical ventilation or renal replacement therapy, and in-hospital mortality. RESULTS: Of 1,718 patients with septic shock, 1,012 (58.9%) patients were culture-positive (blood 803, urine 302, sputum 102, others 204) and the median pathogen detection time was 9.5 h (aerobic 10.2 h and anaerobic 9.0 h). The most common site of culture-positive infection was the hepatobiliary tract (39.5%), while for the culture-negative it was the lower respiratory tract (38.2%). The culture-negative group had a lower mean body temperature (37.3 vs 37.7 ℃), lactate (2.5 vs. 3.2 mmol/L), C-reactive protein (11.1 vs 11.9 mg/dL), and sequential organ failure assessment score (7.0 vs. 8.0) than that of the culture-positive group. However, 90-day mortality between the groups was not significantly different (32.7 vs 32.2%, p = 0.83), and the other clinical outcomes also did not differ significantly. Moreover, a shorter culture detection time was correlated with a higher sequential organ failure assessment score but not with mortality. CONCLUSION: Patients with septic shock are frequently culture-negative, especially in cases where the infection focus is in the lower respiratory tract. Although culture-negative was associated with a degree of organ dysfunction, it was not an independent predictor of death.
BACKGROUND: We evaluated the characteristics and outcomes of culture-negative versus culture-positive septic shock. METHODS: We performed a retrospective observational study of data from a prospective registry from 2014 to 2018. A total of 2,499 adult patients with septic shock were enrolled. The primary outcome was 90-day mortality, and the secondary outcomes were the length of hospital stay, a requirement for mechanical ventilation or renal replacement therapy, and in-hospital mortality. RESULTS: Of 1,718 patients with septic shock, 1,012 (58.9%) patients were culture-positive (blood 803, urine 302, sputum 102, others 204) and the median pathogen detection time was 9.5 h (aerobic 10.2 h and anaerobic 9.0 h). The most common site of culture-positive infection was the hepatobiliary tract (39.5%), while for the culture-negative it was the lower respiratory tract (38.2%). The culture-negative group had a lower mean body temperature (37.3 vs 37.7 ℃), lactate (2.5 vs. 3.2 mmol/L), C-reactive protein (11.1 vs 11.9 mg/dL), and sequential organ failure assessment score (7.0 vs. 8.0) than that of the culture-positive group. However, 90-day mortality between the groups was not significantly different (32.7 vs 32.2%, p = 0.83), and the other clinical outcomes also did not differ significantly. Moreover, a shorter culture detection time was correlated with a higher sequential organ failure assessment score but not with mortality. CONCLUSION:Patients with septic shock are frequently culture-negative, especially in cases where the infection focus is in the lower respiratory tract. Although culture-negative was associated with a degree of organ dysfunction, it was not an independent predictor of death.
Entities:
Keywords:
Culture; Mortality; Sepsis; Septic shock; Time to blood culture positivity
Authors: S Siméon; V Le Moing; S Tubiana; X Duval; D Fournier; J-P Lavigne; M-L Erpelding; C-A Gustave; S Desage; C Chirouze; F Vandenesch; P Tattevin Journal: Clin Microbiol Infect Date: 2018-07-21 Impact factor: 8.067
Authors: Shravan Kethireddy; Beliz Bilgili; Amanda Sees; H Lester Kirchner; Uchenna R Ofoma; R Bruce Light; Yazdan Mirzanejad; Dennis Maki; Aseem Kumar; A Joseph Layon; Joseph E Parrillo; Anand Kumar Journal: Crit Care Med Date: 2018-04 Impact factor: 7.598
Authors: Andrew Rhodes; Laura E Evans; Waleed Alhazzani; Mitchell M Levy; Massimo Antonelli; Ricard Ferrer; Anand Kumar; Jonathan E Sevransky; Charles L Sprung; Mark E Nunnally; Bram Rochwerg; Gordon D Rubenfeld; Derek C Angus; Djillali Annane; Richard J Beale; Geoffrey J Bellinghan; Gordon R Bernard; Jean-Daniel Chiche; Craig Coopersmith; Daniel P De Backer; Craig J French; Seitaro Fujishima; Herwig Gerlach; Jorge Luis Hidalgo; Steven M Hollenberg; Alan E Jones; Dilip R Karnad; Ruth M Kleinpell; Younsuk Koh; Thiago Costa Lisboa; Flavia R Machado; John J Marini; John C Marshall; John E Mazuski; Lauralyn A McIntyre; Anthony S McLean; Sangeeta Mehta; Rui P Moreno; John Myburgh; Paolo Navalesi; Osamu Nishida; Tiffany M Osborn; Anders Perner; Colleen M Plunkett; Marco Ranieri; Christa A Schorr; Maureen A Seckel; Christopher W Seymour; Lisa Shieh; Khalid A Shukri; Steven Q Simpson; Mervyn Singer; B Taylor Thompson; Sean R Townsend; Thomas Van der Poll; Jean-Louis Vincent; W Joost Wiersinga; Janice L Zimmerman; R Phillip Dellinger Journal: Intensive Care Med Date: 2017-01-18 Impact factor: 17.440
Authors: C J Karvellas; J G Abraldes; S Zepeda-Gomez; D C Moffat; Y Mirzanejad; G Vazquez-Grande; E K Esfahani; A Kumar Journal: Aliment Pharmacol Ther Date: 2016-08-10 Impact factor: 8.171
Authors: Kristina E Rudd; Sarah Charlotte Johnson; Kareha M Agesa; Katya Anne Shackelford; Derrick Tsoi; Daniel Rhodes Kievlan; Danny V Colombara; Kevin S Ikuta; Niranjan Kissoon; Simon Finfer; Carolin Fleischmann-Struzek; Flavia R Machado; Konrad K Reinhart; Kathryn Rowan; Christopher W Seymour; R Scott Watson; T Eoin West; Fatima Marinho; Simon I Hay; Rafael Lozano; Alan D Lopez; Derek C Angus; Christopher J L Murray; Mohsen Naghavi Journal: Lancet Date: 2020-01-18 Impact factor: 202.731
Authors: Alicia M Alcamo; Mira K Trivedi; Carly Dulabon; Christopher M Horvat; Geoffrey J Bond; Joseph A Carcillo; Michael Green; Marian G Michaels; Rajesh K Aneja Journal: Am J Transplant Date: 2021-07-28 Impact factor: 8.086